Definition Of A Catch

[Pompous Elitist]

Because, confused. The catch, fumble, scoop and carry sequence that was called an incompletion. This deserves further discussion because it's a fundamental rule. What is a catch?

Per the NCAA officiating manual:

Catch, Interception, Recovery
ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and

Discuss

 

[mnsportsgeek]

I'd like an explanation from either the conference or the officials.

I personally think holding the ball and getting 2+ steps satisfies section 3.

 

[GopherJake]

Clearly a catch and fumble. He caught the ball, took a step, ball didn't come loose during that sequence, then it popped loose on the hit. Whistle never should have blown. Couldn't believe they didn't award MN the ball, which they can do, even if the whistle blows, if it's a clear and immediate recovery.

 

[BarnBoy]

I was watching the game with a die-hard fan of another B1G program (not Purdue). He looks at me and says, "You guys just got hosed".
I cried and opened another beer.

 

[Ski U Master]

I'd like an explanation from either the conference or the officials.

I personally think holding the ball and getting 2+ steps satisfies section 3.

I think that would qualify it under the "advancing" part of the rule.

 

[Oregon Gopher]

It's a poorly written rule- leaves too much to interpretation. However, in looking at it a few times he only took one step after catching the ball.

 

[GopherinPhilly]

Ball was caught, tucked and he turned and took a step then got lit up and fumbled.

This was a case of the replay booth covering for a horrible on field call because they can and they do. B1G BS protectiong their idiotic officiating crews like always.

 

[Oregon Gopher]

I agree- but both college and the NFL can't come up with an objective definition. In the NFL they would have covered for it by the "he didn't make a football move after the catch".

 

[mplsbadger]

I kept thinking to myself that if the hit had occurred in the end zone they would have called it a touchdown.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Ball was caught, tucked and he turned and took a step then got lit up and fumbled.

This was a case of the replay booth covering for a horrible on field call because they can and they do. B1G BS protectiong their idiotic officiating crews like always.

I wonder why they don't have a similar system as the NFL. Make the refs responsible for these calls. Don't let them get bailed out by some anonymous guy in a room with 12 TVs.

 

[tonestang]

A little background on this crew they are consistently one of the highest ranked crews in all of the big 10 and are usually assigned to one of then bcs games. Not saying they didn't get a couple calls wrong today but they are actually a very good crew.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

This definitely wasn't as egregious a game as the Northwestern or Michigan game where it seemed like there were awful calls on every drive. However, the play under discussion seemed pretty cut and dried to most seasoned football fans, the announcers, and obviously there was a lot of discussion amongst the refs as the review went on for a long, long time.

So, what is a football move? One step, two, three? there has to be an objective standard, period. I think we can all agree if the receiver had ran 10 yards, hit, and fumbled there is no discussion. Likewise a simultaneous catch, hit, and drop is not controversial. I define a football move as advancing the ball, ie two or more steps/two feet down after the ball is in the hands.

 

[killme]

Ball was caught, tucked and he turned and took a step then got lit up and fumbled.

This was a case of the replay booth covering for a horrible on field call because they can and they do. B1G BS protectiong their idiotic officiating crews like always.

While I strongly agree I tried to use my imagination to come up with any possible justification for the decision by the replay official not to overturn the call on the field. The only possible explanation is there is a slim chance the camera angles I saw block the ball after the catch and it's possible it wobbled. I guess if 100 objective people saw the replays, didn't know the call on the field, and had to give their opinion, there might be different answers.

I kept thinking to myself that if the hit had occurred in the end zone they would have called it a touchdown.

Agree.

 

[mcgi0024]

You won't get a clarification on the call because the correct response would look like this: "The call should have been ruled a catch and a fumble with Minnesota having the opportunity to advance the change in possession. Since we blew the whistle and didn't want to look stupid for having to spot the ball back at the 2 we stubbornly saved faced by sticking to our bad call."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

I kept thinking to myself that if the hit had occurred in the end zone they would have called it a touchdown.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[XMan]

You won't get a clarification on the call because the correct response would look like this: "The call should have been ruled a catch and a fumble with Minnesota having the opportunity to advance the change in possession. Since we blew the whistle and didn't want to look stupid for having to spot the ball back at the 2 we stubbornly saved faced by sticking to our bad call."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is exactly what happened. I was totally shocked with the replay decision. Pissed too

 

[Some guy]

I don't think it was a catch. If you watch it in regular speed and not slow motion it is a bang bang play. I don't think it would have been a bad call either way. Close play, judgement call.

 

[MNVCGUY]

While I strongly agree I tried to use my imagination to come up with any possible justification for the decision by the replay official not to overturn the call on the field. The only possible explanation is there is a slim chance the camera angles I saw block the ball after the catch and it's possible it wobbled. I guess if 100 objective people saw the replays, didn't know the call on the field, and had to give their opinion, there might be different answers.

Watching the replay on the jumbotron from section 245 I thought the ball was still moving at the time of impact and was not shocked when they didn't overturn the call. Have not watched the TV copy yet but that was just my take watching it from the stands and I know that will not be a popular opinion here.

 

[gopherfannnn]

Watching the replay on the jumbotron from section 245 I thought the ball was still moving at the time of impact and was not shocked when they didn't overturn the call. Have not watched the TV copy yet but that was just my take watching it from the stands and I know that will not be a popular opinion here.

What are you drinking? It was clearly a catch and fumble. They should not have blown the play dead. As stated above, the whole situation was made worse when the replay officials didn't overturn. Refs make mistakes all the time, but with replay they should be able to get it right if the proper view is there.

 

[husker70]

This was bad on two levels at least. First the call it was a catch and he fumbled. Second the replay clearly showed he had control and advanced it with two steps and fumbled. The idea of replay and the delay is to correct an error. And that didn't happen. The Big 10 Office, your up, what happened here?

 

[Brick House]

Was at the game and told my buddy the same this thing, had he been in the end zone they would have called it a TD

 

[rickyupchurch]

You don't whistle the play dead because if replay showed it was a fumble the ball is dead. The NFL would have let it play out and then have video replay sort it out. Then the recovering team doesn't get hosed out of the return yards.

 

[BarnBoy]

That is exactly what happened. I was totally shocked with the replay decision. Pissed too

Exactly what I thought too.

 

[tikited]

This was bad on two levels at least. First the call it was a catch and he fumbled. Second the replay clearly showed he had control and advanced it with two steps and fumbled. The idea of replay and the delay is to correct an error. And that didn't happen. The Big 10 Office, your up, what happened here?

Obvious catch. Just watched it again and it wasn't close to be an incomplete pass.

 

[corcoran1]

I'd like an explanation from either the conference or the officials.

I personally think holding the ball and getting 2+ steps satisfies section 3.

+1.
I am not normally a conspiracy theorist, but as far as I am concerned they did not reverse the call because they screwed up the play by stopping Thompson's return and would have had no idea where to spot it.
He clearly had two steps with the ball and was moving to the goal line when Thompson stopped him and it would not have been dropped had Antonio Johnson not slobberknocked him. The receiver could hardly get up.

 

[Section209]

You won't get a clarification on the call because the correct response would look like this: "The call should have been ruled a catch and a fumble with Minnesota having the opportunity to advance the change in possession. Since we blew the whistle and didn't want to look stupid for having to spot the ball back at the 2 we stubbornly saved faced by sticking to our bad call."

Exactly. Letting the play stand was the only way they could keep that mess from becoming any worse than it already was.

 

[corcoran1]

I don't think it was a catch. If you watch it in regular speed and not slow motion it is a bang bang play. I don't think it would have been a bad call either way. Close play, judgement call.

No, The receiver was already being tackled when Johnson hit him. Johnson caused the fumble and he was the second tackler, how is that not a catch and fumble.

 

[Some guy]

You have to complete the catch and make a football move. You could pretty easily argue that the first two steps weren't a football move post catch, but rather part of the process of the catch.

I don't think it was a bad call. I don't think calling it the other way would have been a bad call either.

 

[DoubleB]

What are you drinking? It was clearly a catch and fumble. They should not have blown the play dead. As stated above, the whole situation was made worse when the replay officials didn't overturn. Refs make mistakes all the time, but with replay they should be able to get it right if the proper view is there.

245? never get tickets in that section because it must be too far away to see anything with clarity. in section 107 (right in front of the said call) it was so obvious that the WR caught the ball and fumbled I would like someone from the officials to say what happened. the WR catches the ball with back to the goal. secures the ball tightly to his chest starts to get wrapped up and steps and turns to drive to score when Johnson lights him up like a xmas tree and the ball gets dislodged from the WR's arms while he is now facing the end zone. How is this not clearly a football advancement? saw the game replay in the middle of the morning and have it DVR'd it was a catch and fumble on Saturday and still is today

if 100 non fans of either team or refs from other leagues or games saw this without knowing what was called I would say 90% would have come up with a catch and fumble.

but as a friend told me good teams over come having to play the 12th member of the opposing team, and we did

 

[tjgopher]

A little background on this crew they are consistently one of the highest ranked crews in all of the big 10 and are usually assigned to one of then bcs games. Not saying they didn't get a couple calls wrong today but they are actually a very good crew.

Kind of.

The Referee of that crew yesterday lives in Hutchinson, Minnesota and grew up a Gopher fan. But, he has only been a Referee of a crew for a short time. Before that, he was part of a Big Ten crew as the Field Judge and who was assigned big games, including national title games.

The Back Judge on yesterday's crew who blew the play dead is a former Iowa wide receiver, who has also worked big games.

But, this crew - as a whole - has not worked BCS game as a unit.